Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] urpmi-4.3-15mdk

[Stefan van der Eijk]

If, however, you urpme'd libbar, foo *would* be uninstalled. That
is, urpme uninstalls things that depend on the package you call to
be urpme'd, but not things the package you call to be urpme'd
depends upon. Clear?

Yep. So you would like a switch / option to be added that when you
remove foo (urpme foo --something) that it'll suggest to remove
libbar and libmoo as well. Hmmm... Interesting. What criteria will be
used to remove those packages? Should start with "lib"? Only the top-
level ones?

[snip: description of method]

You suggesting to calculate it. These calculations can become very
complex. I would suggest to make a log. So if you urpmi foo, you also
have to install bar and blah. This results in a line in
/var/cache/urpmi/installlog: foo bar blah

Q: What would the impact be if you install multiple packages with one urpmi command? "urpmi bla foo kitchensink" ?

It would mean parsing the log to figure out what happened. IMHO what happened at one time is not relevant, the current state of the system is. If such an option is to be done then it should take place without logfiles or such.

Now if urpme tries to uninstall foo it will read that line and will try
to uninstall those rpms, on request and only if no other apps have grown
dependent on them as well.

urpme foo, would that deinstall bla and kitchensink as well? Or would multple log entries need to be made for every package that is installed from urpmi (different entry for bla, foo and kitchensink). What if they share dependencies? Where do you put what? What if you then remove "bla", a shared dep remains, and then remove "foo". That shared dep would need to go then too... Difficult.

This sounds like a much simpler and therefor safer solution. Most of
the time I know after 10 minutes of using an app whether I like it or
not ;)

Sorry, it doesn't sound right to me...

Stefan

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature